@monoes/monomindcli 2.15.3 → 2.15.5

package/org-skills/cro-advisor/references/sales_playbook.md

@@ -0,0 +1,461 @@
+# Sales Playbook
+
+Frameworks for building, running, and scaling a B2B SaaS sales organization.
+
+---
+
+## Sales Process Design
+
+A sales process is a repeatable series of steps that takes a prospect from first contact to closed revenue. Without it, you have individual heroics, not a scalable machine.
+
+### The Core Funnel
+
+```
+Lead Generation → Qualification → Discovery → Demo → Trial / POC → Proposal → Negotiation → Close → Handoff
+```
+
+Each stage has a clear entry criterion, exit criterion, and owner.
+
+### Stage Definitions
+
+#### Stage 0: Lead / Suspect
+- **Entry:** Contact exists in CRM with basic firmographic data
+- **Owner:** Marketing or SDR
+- **Exit criterion:** Meets ICP criteria (company size, industry, tech stack)
+- **Action:** Research, prioritize, add to outbound sequence
+
+#### Stage 1: Prospecting / Outreach
+- **Entry:** ICP-qualified account, no contact yet
+- **Owner:** SDR or AE (depending on model)
+- **Exit criterion:** Meeting booked with a qualified contact
+- **Action:** Multi-channel outreach (email + call + LinkedIn), 8-12 touch sequence
+- **Key metric:** Meeting booked rate (benchmark: 2-5% of outbound contacts)
+
+#### Stage 2: Discovery
+- **Entry:** First meeting confirmed
+- **Owner:** AE (SDR hands off or joins)
+- **Exit criterion:** Confirmed: pain, budget range, decision process, timeline
+- **Action:** Ask questions. Listen. Map the org. Don't pitch yet.
+- **Key metric:** Discovery-to-demo rate (benchmark: 60-80% proceed)
+
+**Discovery question framework:**
+```
+Situation:    "How do you currently handle [problem area]?"
+Problem:      "What's the impact when [pain point] happens?"
+Implication:  "If this continues, what does that mean for [business goal]?"
+Need-payoff:  "If we solved this, what would that be worth to you?"
+```
+
+#### Stage 3: Demo / Solution Presentation
+- **Entry:** Confirmed pain and fit from discovery
+- **Owner:** AE (+ SE for complex products)
+- **Exit criterion:** Prospect agrees to evaluate / trial; next step defined
+- **Action:** Show the workflow that solves their specific pain (not a feature tour)
+- **Key metric:** Demo-to-trial/proposal rate (benchmark: 40-60%)
+
+**Demo structure:**
+1. Recap their pain (show you listened) — 5 min
+2. Show the "aha moment" (fastest path to value) — 10 min
+3. Walk the specific workflow they described — 15 min
+4. Handle objections, confirm fit — 5 min
+5. Define clear next step (date, owners, criteria) — 5 min
+
+Never show features they didn't ask for. Every additional feature is noise until they have a reason to care.
+
+#### Stage 4: Trial / POC
+- **Entry:** Prospect commits to evaluate with real data/use case
+- **Owner:** AE + CSM or SE
+- **Exit criterion:** Success criteria met, POC success confirmed
+- **Action:** Define success criteria upfront (in writing). Set a tight timeframe (2-4 weeks max).
+- **Key metric:** POC-to-proposal rate (benchmark: 50-70%)
+
+**POC setup requirements:**
+```
+Before any POC:
+  □ Signed NDA
+  □ Written success criteria ("We'll move forward if X happens")
+  □ Named champion who owns the evaluation
+  □ Executive sponsor identified
+  □ Defined timeline with end date
+  □ Agreed next step if criteria are met
+```
+
+If you can't get written success criteria, you don't have a real opportunity. You have a "we'll see."
+
+#### Stage 5: Proposal / Pricing
+- **Entry:** POC success OR strong discovery fit for simple products
+- **Owner:** AE
+- **Exit criterion:** Proposal received, timeline to decision confirmed
+- **Action:** Present in a live call, never email a proposal cold
+- **Key metric:** Proposal-to-negotiation rate (benchmark: 50-75%)
+
+**Proposal structure:**
+1. Problem statement (their words, not yours)
+2. Proposed solution (mapped to their workflow)
+3. ROI summary (value delivered vs. investment)
+4. Pricing options (give 2-3 options; anchors the decision)
+5. Next steps with dates
+
+#### Stage 6: Negotiation
+- **Entry:** Verbal intent to proceed, price/terms discussion begins
+- **Owner:** AE (+ VP Sales for large deals)
+- **Exit criterion:** Mutual agreement on terms; contract sent
+- **Action:** Never discount before they ask. Discount on scope, not on margin.
+- **Key metric:** Negotiation win rate (benchmark: 70-85%)
+
+**Negotiation principles:**
+- Get something for everything you give. Discount → multi-year. Fast close → early pay discount.
+- Don't negotiate against yourself. Silence after an offer is not rejection.
+- Know your walk-away before you enter. If you don't have a BATNA, you have no leverage.
+- Legal/procurement delay ≠ deal death. Keep the champion engaged.
+
+#### Stage 7: Close
+- **Entry:** Signed contract or PO received
+- **Owner:** AE
+- **Exit criterion:** Contract countersigned, kickoff date set
+- **Action:** Celebrate with the customer. Immediately introduce CSM.
+- **Key metric:** Average close rate (closed won ÷ all closed = won + lost)
+
+#### Stage 8: Handoff to Customer Success
+- **Entry:** Deal closed
+- **Owner:** AE + CSM
+- **Exit criterion:** Customer has met their assigned CSM, kickoff scheduled
+- **Action:** Internal handoff call with AE + CSM. AE shares: deal context, key stakeholders, use case, success criteria, any promises made during the sale.
+
+**Handoff document (AE fills before first CS meeting):**
+```
+Account: [name]
+ACV: $X
+Close date: [date]
+Primary contact: [name, title, email]
+Economic buyer: [name, title]
+Use case: [specific workflow]
+Success criteria: [what they said good looks like in 90 days]
+Promises made: [anything specific committed during sale]
+Risk flags: [competitive, budget, champion strength]
+```
+
+---
+
+## MEDDPICC Qualification Framework
+
+MEDDPICC is the enterprise qualification standard. If you can't answer every letter, you don't have a qualified opportunity — you have a conversation.
+
+### M — Metrics
+What is the quantified business impact? What does winning look like in numbers?
+
+- "What's the current cost of [the problem]?"
+- "How do you measure success in this area today?"
+- "If we achieve X outcome, what does that save or earn you?"
+
+**Red flag:** No metrics = no business case = hard to get budget.
+
+### E — Economic Buyer
+Who has final authority to approve the budget?
+
+- "Who else will be involved in the final decision?"
+- "Have you purchased solutions in this range before? Who approved that?"
+- "When we get to final terms, who needs to sign?"
+
+**Red flag:** You only know the user buyer. Economic buyer hasn't engaged.
+
+### D — Decision Criteria
+What factors will they use to evaluate and select a solution?
+
+- "What's most important in your evaluation?"
+- "How will you compare options?"
+- "What does the ideal solution look like to you?"
+
+**Why it matters:** If you don't know their criteria, you're guessing what to prove. Define the criteria before you compete on them.
+
+### D — Decision Process
+What are the steps from evaluation to signed contract?
+
+- "Walk me through your process from here to signed agreement."
+- "Does procurement get involved? Legal? InfoSec?"
+- "Have you purchased software at this price before? How long did that take?"
+
+**Red flag:** No defined process = unlimited sales cycle.
+
+### P — Paper Process
+What's the contract and legal process?
+
+- "Who manages vendor contracts on your side?"
+- "What's your standard MSA, or do you use ours?"
+- "How long does legal review typically take?"
+
+**Why it matters:** Legal and procurement have killed many "done" deals. Start early. Route to your legal team simultaneously.
+
+### I — Identify Pain
+What is the specific, felt pain driving this evaluation?
+
+- "What triggered this initiative now vs. six months ago?"
+- "What happens if you don't solve this in Q3?"
+- "On a scale of 1-10, how urgent is this for your team?"
+
+**Red flag:** Pain isn't felt by the economic buyer. User pain ≠ budget authority.
+
+### C — Champion
+Who will actively sell your solution internally when you're not in the room?
+
+- "Who else have you brought into this evaluation?"
+- "Can you help us get access to [economic buyer / IT / security]?"
+- "If the decision went the wrong way, who would be disappointed?"
+
+**Red flag:** Your champion is enthusiastic but has no internal influence.
+
+### C — Competition
+Who else are they evaluating? What's your position?
+
+- "Are you looking at alternatives?"
+- "What made you start with us?"
+- "Have you used [Competitor X] before?"
+
+**Why it matters:** Knowing the competitive field tells you what you need to prove and what to neutralize.
+
+### MEDDPICC Scorecard
+
+| Letter | Score 1 | Score 2 | Score 3 |
+|--------|---------|---------|---------|
+| Metrics | No numbers | Approximate value | Specific ROI model |
+| Economic Buyer | Unknown | Named, not engaged | Engaged directly |
+| Decision Criteria | Vague | Partially defined | Written, weighted |
+| Decision Process | Unknown | Verbal description | Steps confirmed, timeline known |
+| Paper Process | Unknown | Basic awareness | Legal contacts, standard process known |
+| Identify Pain | No urgency | User-level pain | Executive-level pain with consequences |
+| Champion | No advocate | Friendly contact | Actively selling internally |
+| Competition | Unknown | Identified | Position mapped, differentiation clear |
+
+**Score each 1-3. Total 16+/24 = qualified opportunity. Under 12 = unqualified, do not forecast.**
+
+---
+
+## Sales Compensation Plans
+
+Comp drives behavior. Design it precisely.
+
+### Base / Variable Split
+
+| Role | Base % | Variable % | Rationale |
+|------|--------|-----------|-----------|
+| SDR | 60-70% | 30-40% | Activity-based, not purely revenue |
+| AE (Inside Sales) | 50% | 50% | Balanced risk/reward |
+| AE (Enterprise) | 55-60% | 40-45% | Longer cycle, higher base for stability |
+| VP Sales | 50% | 50% | Accountable for team results |
+| CSM (retention focus) | 70% | 30% | Less variable, stable relationship role |
+| CSM (expansion focus) | 60% | 40% | Expansion quota adds variable |
+
+### Commission Structure
+
+**Standard AE plan:**
+```
+Base: $80K
+Variable: $80K (at 100% quota attainment)
+OTE: $160K
+
+Commission rate: OTE variable ÷ Quota
+  If quota = $800K ARR: commission = $80K ÷ $800K = 10% of ARR closed
+
+Accelerators (performance above quota):
+  101-125% quota: 1.25x commission rate (12.5% of ARR)
+  126-150% quota: 1.5x commission rate (15% of ARR)
+  > 150% quota: 2.0x commission rate (20% of ARR)
+```
+
+**Why accelerators matter:**
+- They keep top performers motivated past quota
+- They make it possible for top reps to earn $200K+ (attracting talent)
+- They create the "make it rain" culture
+
+### SDR Compensation
+
+SDRs are measured on output (meetings booked, pipeline created), not closed revenue.
+
+```
+Quota: 20 qualified meetings booked per month (or $X pipeline created)
+Commission: $150-300 per qualified meeting held
+
+Accelerators:
+  If a meeting converts to closed won: Bonus $250-500
+  If monthly meetings > 125% of quota: 1.5x rate on upside meetings
+```
+
+### Clawbacks
+
+A clawback recovers commission paid on deals that churn or are fraudulently closed.
+
+**Common clawback rules:**
+- Full clawback if customer cancels within 90 days of close
+- 50% clawback if customer cancels within 91-180 days
+- No clawback after 180 days (AE shouldn't be penalized for future CS failures)
+- Clawbacks vest: pay commission immediately but apply against next quarter's payout if triggered
+
+**Why clawbacks matter:**
+- Without them, reps are incentivized to close any deal, regardless of fit
+- With them, reps self-qualify more carefully
+
+### SPIFFs (Sales Performance Incentive Funds)
+
+Short-term tactical incentives for specific behaviors:
+- $5K bonus for closing a new vertical deal this quarter
+- 1.5x commission on annual prepay deals in Q4
+- $1K for closing a deal in a new geographic territory
+
+Use SPIFFs sparingly. Overuse trains reps to wait for the SPIFF before engaging.
+
+### Multi-Year and Prepay Incentives
+
+Align rep behavior with company cash flow:
+- Multi-year deals: Credit full TCV against quota, pay commission upfront on TCV
+- Annual prepay: 10-20% uplift on commission rate
+- Monthly billing: Standard commission rate
+
+---
+
+## Enterprise vs. SMB vs. Self-Serve Models
+
+### Self-Serve / PLG
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- Product is the primary acquisition channel
+- Credit card required (no invoicing)
+- No human touch in the initial purchase
+- Sales engages only at enterprise signals (high usage, team expansion, compliance needs)
+
+**Funnel:**
+```
+Website → Free trial / Freemium → Activation → PQL → Expansion → Enterprise
+```
+
+**Key metrics:**
+- Free-to-paid conversion rate (benchmark: 2-5% of signups)
+- Time to activation (first core action)
+- PQL → expansion conversion rate
+- NRR from self-serve base
+
+**Sales involvement triggers (PQL signals):**
+- Team size > 10 seats
+- Usage spikes (power user patterns)
+- Feature limit hits on core features
+- Job title change (new economic buyer appears in account)
+
+### SMB Inside Sales
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- ACV $5K-25K
+- 30-60 day sales cycle
+- Inbound-heavy or light outbound
+- SDR → AE → CS model
+- Phone + email + video; no in-person
+
+**Funnel:**
+```
+Inbound/MQL → SDR qualifies → AE discovery → Demo → Proposal → Close
+```
+
+**Key metrics:**
+- MQL-to-SQL rate (benchmark: 15-25%)
+- SQL-to-close rate (benchmark: 20-30%)
+- Average sales cycle (30-60 days)
+- AE productivity: $600K-$1M quota per rep
+
+**Team ratios:**
+- 1 SDR supports 3-4 AEs
+- 1 CSM manages $1M-2M ARR
+
+### Enterprise Sales
+
+**Characteristics:**
+- ACV $50K+
+- 90-365 day sales cycle
+- Outbound prospecting + inbound from brand
+- AE + SE + executive sponsor model
+- Multi-stakeholder: champion, economic buyer, IT, legal, procurement
+
+**Funnel:**
+```
+Account targeting → Executive outreach → Discovery → POC → Security review → Legal → Procurement → Close
+```
+
+**Key metrics:**
+- Deals in pipeline (volume matters less, quality more)
+- POC win rate (benchmark: 60-75%)
+- Average sales cycle (3-12 months)
+- AE productivity: $1.5M-$3M quota per rep
+
+**Team ratios:**
+- 1 SE supports 3-4 AEs
+- 1 CSM manages $2M-5M ARR (named accounts, high-touch)
+
+---
+
+## Sales Hiring and Ramp
+
+### What "Good" Looks Like by Role
+
+**SDR (entry level):**
+- 1-2 years of outbound experience OR strong track record in customer-facing role
+- Resilient: rejection is the job
+- Coachable: SDR is a proving ground, not a final destination
+- Can write clear, concise prospecting emails without templates
+
+**AE (inside sales):**
+- 2-4 years sales experience, preferably SaaS
+- Can articulate their process for a discovery call
+- Knows their numbers: quota, attainment, average deal size, sales cycle
+- Shows how they build pipeline (AEs who only work inbound are a risk)
+
+**AE (enterprise):**
+- 4-8 years B2B sales, at least 2 in enterprise
+- Has closed deals > $100K ACV
+- Can name the stakeholders in a complex deal they navigated
+- Understands procurement, security review, multi-year contracts
+
+**VP Sales:**
+- Has scaled a team from where you are to 2x your size
+- Can build a comp plan from scratch
+- Has hiring and firing experience
+- Revenue from a repeatable process, not personal relationships
+
+### Interview Process
+
+**3-stage process:**
+1. **Recruiter screen** (30 min): Motivation, experience, logistics
+2. **Manager interview** (60 min): Structured questions on process, examples, numbers
+3. **Panel / role play** (90 min): Mock discovery call + debrief; team fit
+
+**Role play rubric:**
+- Did they prepare (knew your product, your ICP)?
+- Did they ask before pitching?
+- Did they handle pushback without capitulating immediately?
+- Did they confirm a next step with a date?
+
+### Onboarding Structure (6-Week Ramp)
+
+| Week | Focus | Activities |
+|------|-------|-----------|
+| 1 | Company, product, ICP | Onboarding sessions, product sandbox, shadow AE calls |
+| 2 | Sales process, tools, messaging | CRM training, call review, write first prospecting emails |
+| 3 | First outreach | Send first sequences, book first meetings, shadow closes |
+| 4 | Independent discovery | Lead own discovery calls with manager reviewing |
+| 5 | Full cycle | Handle pipeline independently, weekly coaching |
+| 6 | Quota-bearing | 25% of quota expectation; full accountability begins |
+
+### Performance Management
+
+**Clear standards, no surprises:**
+```
+Month 3: 25% of quota expected. Miss by > 50% → performance conversation.
+Month 4: 50% of quota expected. Miss by > 40% → PIP warning.
+Month 5: 75% of quota. Miss by > 30% → formal PIP.
+Month 6+: 100% of quota. Consistent miss → exit.
+```
+
+**PIP (Performance Improvement Plan) — not for show:**
+- Should include specific, measurable targets (not "improve attitude")
+- 30-60 day timeline
+- Weekly check-ins with manager
+- If targets aren't met: exit, no extensions
+- A PIP that doesn't lead to improvement or exit is a management failure
+
+**Rule:** Low performers who stay cost you your top performers. They watch what you tolerate.

package/{dist/src/orgrt/role-skills/cro-specialist.md → org-skills/cro-specialist/SKILL.md}

@@ -1,3 +1,11 @@
+---
+name: cro-specialist
+description: "CRO Specialist role best practices. Diagnoses why visitors on a page, flow, or form aren't converting, and turns that diagnosis into prioritized, testable recommendations grounded in behavioral psychology."
+tags: ["product"]
+tools: []
+license: Apache-2.0
+source: https://github.com/monoes/monomind
+---
 # CRO Specialist — Best Practices
 
 ## Focus

package/org-skills/csharp-developer/LICENSE.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) 2025
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
+of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
+in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
+to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
+furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
+copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
+FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
+AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
+OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
+SOFTWARE.

package/org-skills/csharp-developer/SKILL.md

@@ -0,0 +1,122 @@
+---
+name: csharp-developer
+description: "Use when building C# applications with .NET 8+, ASP.NET Core APIs, or Blazor web apps. Builds REST APIs using minimal or controller-based routing, configures database access with Entity Framework Core, implements async patterns and cancellation, structures applications with CQRS via MediatR, and scaffolds Blazor components with state management."
+tags: ["engineering","backend"]
+tools: ["monograph_query","monograph_context"]
+license: MIT
+source: https://github.com/Jeffallan/claude-skills
+source_path: "skills/csharp-developer"
+source_commit: 882ef55e377dbf9a4dbe496bb41ac6ccd0e555cf
+---
+# C# Developer
+
+Senior C# developer with mastery of .NET 8+ and Microsoft ecosystem. Specializes in high-performance web APIs, cloud-native solutions, and modern C# language features.
+
+## When to Use This Skill
+
+- Building ASP.NET Core APIs (Minimal or Controller-based)
+- Implementing Entity Framework Core data access
+- Creating Blazor web applications (Server/WASM)
+- Optimizing .NET performance with Span<T>, Memory<T>
+- Implementing CQRS with MediatR
+- Setting up authentication/authorization
+
+## Core Workflow
+
+1. **Analyze solution** — Review .csproj files, NuGet packages, architecture
+2. **Design models** — Create domain models, DTOs, validation
+3. **Implement** — Write endpoints, repositories, services with DI
+4. **Optimize** — Apply async patterns, caching, performance tuning
+5. **Test** — Write xUnit tests with TestServer; verify 80%+ coverage
+
+> **EF Core checkpoint (after step 3):** Run `dotnet ef migrations add <Name>` and review the generated migration file before applying. Confirm no unintended table/column drops. Roll back with `dotnet ef migrations remove` if needed.
+
+## Reference Guide
+
+Load detailed guidance based on context:
+
+| Topic | Reference | Load When |
+|-------|-----------|-----------|
+| Modern C# | `references/modern-csharp.md` | Records, pattern matching, nullable types |
+| ASP.NET Core | `references/aspnet-core.md` | Minimal APIs, middleware, DI, routing |
+| Entity Framework | `references/entity-framework.md` | EF Core, migrations, query optimization |
+| Blazor | `references/blazor.md` | Components, state management, interop |
+| Performance | `references/performance.md` | Span<T>, async, memory optimization, AOT |
+
+## Constraints
+
+### MUST DO
+- Enable nullable reference types in all projects
+- Use file-scoped namespaces and primary constructors (C# 12)
+- Apply async/await for all I/O operations — always accept and forward `CancellationToken`:
+  ```csharp
+  // Correct
+  app.MapGet("/items/{id}", async (int id, IItemService svc, CancellationToken ct) =>
+      await svc.GetByIdAsync(id, ct) is { } item ? Results.Ok(item) : Results.NotFound());
+  ```
+- Use dependency injection for all services
+- Include XML documentation for public APIs
+- Implement proper error handling with Result pattern:
+  ```csharp
+  public readonly record struct Result<T>(T? Value, string? Error, bool IsSuccess)
+  {
+      public static Result<T> Ok(T value) => new(value, null, true);
+      public static Result<T> Fail(string error) => new(default, error, false);
+  }
+  ```
+- Use strongly-typed configuration with `IOptions<T>`
+
+### MUST NOT DO
+- Use blocking calls (`.Result`, `.Wait()`) in async code:
+  ```csharp
+  // Wrong — blocks thread and risks deadlock
+  var data = service.GetDataAsync().Result;
+
+  // Correct
+  var data = await service.GetDataAsync(ct);
+  ```
+- Disable nullable warnings without proper justification
+- Skip cancellation token support in async methods
+- Expose EF Core entities directly in API responses — always map to DTOs
+- Use string-based configuration keys
+- Skip input validation
+- Ignore code analysis warnings
+
+## Output Templates
+
+When implementing .NET features, provide:
+1. Domain models and DTOs
+2. API endpoints (Minimal API or controllers)
+3. Repository/service implementations
+4. Configuration setup (Program.cs, appsettings.json)
+5. Brief explanation of architectural decisions
+
+## Example: Minimal API Endpoint
+
+```csharp
+// Program.cs (file-scoped, .NET 8 minimal API)
+var builder = WebApplication.CreateBuilder(args);
+builder.Services.AddScoped<IProductService, ProductService>();
+
+var app = builder.Build();
+
+app.MapGet("/products/{id:int}", async (
+    int id,
+    IProductService service,
+    CancellationToken ct) =>
+{
+    var result = await service.GetByIdAsync(id, ct);
+    return result.IsSuccess ? Results.Ok(result.Value) : Results.NotFound(result.Error);
+})
+.WithName("GetProduct")
+.Produces<ProductDto>()
+.ProducesProblem(404);
+
+app.Run();
+```
+
+## Knowledge Reference
+
+C# 12, .NET 8, ASP.NET Core, Minimal APIs, Blazor (Server/WASM), Entity Framework Core, MediatR, xUnit, Moq, Benchmark.NET, SignalR, gRPC, Azure SDK, Polly, FluentValidation, Serilog
+
+[Documentation](https://jeffallan.github.io/claude-skills/skills/language/csharp-developer/)